Early Roman Countermarked coins from Moesia: First critical observations (Typology, Frequency, Chronology and Analysis of Distribution). more

ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II НУМИЗМАТИЧНИ И СФРАГИСТИЧНИ ПРИНОСИ КЪМ ИСТОРИЯТА НА ЗАПАДНОТО ЧЕРНОМОРИЕ МЕЖДУНАРОДНА КОНФЕРЕНЦИЯ Варна, 12–15 септември 2001 г. NUMISMATIC AND SPHRAGISTIC CONTRIBUTIONS TO HISTORY OF THE WESTERN BLACK SEA COAST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE Varna, 12–15 september 2001 ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS FROM MOESIA: FIRST CRITICAL OBSERVATIONS (TYPOLOgY, FREqUENCY, ChRONOLOgY AND ANALYSIS OF DISTRIBUTION)* Rodolfo MARTINI, EVgENI PAUNoV (MIlAN, SofIA) COUNTERMARKS This collection, undertaken a couple of years ago, has identified some 4200 countermarked Roman Imperial bronze coins, most of them asses and tresviral dupondii issued by Augustus, series from the Ephesus mint and sestertii issued by Claudius. Nearly all of them are local auxiliary coins minted by the military administration to offset the shortage of small denominations1 and were thus countermarked in Moesia after AD 46 (cf. infra, Historical background) when Claudius reorganized the territories of what is now Bulgaria. The countermarked coins so far collected from the Roman provinces of Moesia and Thrace have included specimens that were clearly minted in Pannonia, as well as those struck in Moesia–Thrace, enabling us to establish the first broad geographic distinction among countermarks on these exemplars: (A) Pannonian types, alone, whose area of production and primary distribution lies between the military camp at Carnuntum and the southern reaches of Illyria; (B) Pannonian and Moesian types together on the same coin, probably struck and distributed initially further to the East, perhaps along the border (?) between Pannonia and Moesia; (C) Moesian types, alone, whose area of production and primary distribution centered along the Danube limes between the military camps at Ratiaria and Durostorum (cf. infra, territorial distribution). The group for which we have the largest number of samples is (C), coins with unaccompanied Moesian countermarks, and currently consists of about 3,500 countermarked pieces. These, in turn, can be divided into three subgroups: (C1) with „associated“ countermarks, the subgroup that is most numerous and shows the most complex internal relations, both chronologically and in terms of minting; (C2) with „isolated“ countermarks of only a few types, found on their own but not associated with other countermarks; * The first part of this article (typology, groups, combinations and comments) is written by Dr Rodolfo Martini (English translation by Philip Grew), and the second (historical background, territorial distribution and circulation patterns) by Evgeni Paunov (translated by the author). 159 Rodolfo Martini, Evgeni Paunov • EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS... (C3) with „uncertain“ countermarks, nearly always present on only a few specimens, either accompanied by (C1) countermarks or unassociated, often with no signs of relationships to the countermarks above. The context of these countermarks is certainly broader both geographically and chronologically than that of the countermarks in (C1) or (C2). The collection of these countermarked materials has made it possible to establish certain premises for discussion, although investigation is still at a preliminary stage and further analyses are scheduled in order to document: (i) the production techniques of the coins and countermarks, whether struck of cast; (ii) internal chronological relations based on relations of over-type and under-type, which are especially common among coins of groups (B) and (C1); (iii) average weights of the countermarked coins, with particular reference to comparison of Roman Tresviral specie with coins from the Ephesus mint; and (iv) the possible breakdown of dating and location for certain countermarks on the basis of production technique. The following points would seem to be elements of certainty: Chronology: The widespread countermarking operation appears to have begun with the 46 Ad territorial reorganization of the Balkans carried out by Claudius’2 Roman administration. It is less immediately apparent when the countermarking ceased, although the use and production (?) of countermarked coinage continued almost certainly until the beginning of Nero’s reign. Distribution: The area involved in the spread of (C1) coinage seems to have been almost exclusively the Danubian part of the Moesian limes, while current data indicate that secondary circulation must have been responsible for the occasional recovery of these materials in Thrace. On the other hand, the (C2) countermark with the isolated type TI•C•A may have been produced and distributed in a larger area, perhaps originally including the Thracian region, while the other three types in group (C2), i.e. DV, PR, and the head of Hercules r.3, appear to have been demonstrably used further to the East (?), with the head of Hercules r. and PR types, in particular, around the coastal area of the provinces of Moesia and Thrace. Circulation: There is an overlapping of countermarks from Pannonia and Moesia, which creates the group (B), with systematic documentation of Pannonian types as under-types for Moesian types. Furthermore, the P•P, countermark shows a variant location, in that it does not appear to belong to Pannonia proper but to an area (?) bordering on Moesia.4 TYPES The number of countermarks attested in Pannonia and documented in Moesia–Thrace and that of countermarks originating in Moesia–Thrace is relatively limited, excluding those in group (C2). The main kinds of types, subdivided by area of production and distribution, are as follows: 160 ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II (A) Pannonian Types These are the (AV)G type from the Carnuntum5 area, the CAE type6 (fig. 1), the IMP type in ligature (fig. 2), either the graphically simple version or the embossed cartouche7 (fig. 3), and the P•P type. fig.1. CAE fig. 2. IMP fig.3. IMP Panonian countermarks (C1) Associated Moesian Types This is the most numerous group and includes types of both lexical and figurative design, in various combinations, with the AVG (fig. 4) type and the TI•CÆ (fig. 5) type by far the most common and always accompanying one another. These are followed by the T•C•A (fig. 6) type and the TI•C•A (fig. 7) type, then by the helmet, both in its frontal depiction (fig. 8) and in its lateral (fig. 9) variety, and the right-facing dolphin, either in an image „with objects“ (patera/crown?) (fig. 10) or in the version „without objects“.8 fig.4. AVG fig. 5. TI•С(АЕ) fig.6.Т•С•А fig. 7. TI•C•A Moesian „associated“ countermarks 161 Rodolfo Martini, Evgeni Paunov • EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS... fig.8. Helmet fig. 9. Helmet fig.10. Right-facing dolphin Moesian „associated“ countermarks (C2) Isolated Moesian Types These consist of three obviously distinct groups: C2a: This is the TI•C•A type in isolation (fig. 11), not associated with the (C1) countermarks, and it is characterized by lettering more slanted than the same type in (C1)9, generally stamped on unstruck flans that weigh between 2,5 and 5 grams and serve to give exposure to the countermark. Such specimens account for approximately half of the entire set of countermarked coins so far documented. C2b: This group includes a few different types probably dating later than (C1), the DV (fig. 12) type on Claudian sestertii, the group of Galba (GALBA, ΓΑΛBA and ΓAΛKAI) types (fig. 13), the PR type (fig. 14) and the head of Hercules r.10 type (fig. 15), to which we can add the right-facing goat’s head/rudder-globe11 type (fig. 16). C2c: This is a group of countermarks whose identification is more complex, both because of their rarity and because of the difficulty in recognizing the coins that were used, due to their poor condition. In general, they consist of simple heads, male and female, human or divine12, with or without ornaments, or of inanimate objects. The investigation of currently known countermarked coins from Moesia–Thrace is still in its preliminary stages and many questions have yet to be precisely framed. Doing so will require both the added information brought to bear by additional specimens and the analysis of the historical and archaeological contexts that we now possess (cf. infra). However, it should be emphasized that the numismatic record, which is of fair quality, is left without a correspondingly broad and sure knowledge of the areas of origin. fig. 11 Moreover, the archaeological record shows a Moesian „not assosiated“ ountermarks (TI•C•A) 162 ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II fig.12. DV fig.13. ГAΛKAI fig. 14. PR fig.15. Head of Hercules r. fig. 16.Right facing goat’s head \rudder-globe Moesian „isolated“ countermarks nearly total lack of determining elements like coins from stratigraphic excavations or contextual information on coin hoards or occurrences of countermarked coins in the territory.13 Although the documentary collection of Moesian–Thracian coinage sheds light on the distribution and circulation of the countermarked coins from the area that have been analyzed, showing the eastward shift of Pannonian countermark types, the lack of congruent archaeological documentation detracts part of the specific meaning from some of the theories that are put forth in this preliminary study. Nevertheless, the specimens that have been identified make it possible to better grasp the widespread phenomenon of countermarking, which had not, heretofore, been tackled across the board. It is to be hoped that this initial documentation will be followed by the collection of further evidence, both numismatic and archaeological, such as may enable us to determine new elements that prove useful in advancing discussion and increasing our understanding of the main unresolved issues regarding primary distribution and circulation of the main types of Moesian countermarks. 163 Rodolfo Martini, Evgeni Paunov • EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS... hISTORICAL BACKgROUNg Moesia was a frontier province of the Roman Empire on the Balkans of strategic importance. It was administratively established under Augustus in АD 12 or by Tiberius in 1514, with C. Popeius Sabinus as its first imperial governor. The Danube river was its northern border – first and most important defensive element. The southern boundary was set on the Haemus/Stara Planina, or the Balkan mountain chain, bordering the last Thracian kingdom, transformed in AD 45 as a province of Thracia. To Moesia, an imperial province under a legate were attached also the territories of Greek cities along the Black Sea western coast (Ripa Thraciae), together with the entire army of Macedonia.15 Later, during Domitian in AD 85/6 the entire province was split by military-strategic reasons (on the eve of the Roman offensive north in Dacia) into two smaller parts: Inferior (lower) and Superior (Upper), with the river Ciabrus (present Tsibritsa) as internal border.16 Among the earliest Roman military camps in Regio Triballorum (a Roman territorial region, formed after the M. Licinius Crassus march in 29/8 ВС, later the province of Moesia), were those at Singidunum (Belgrade), Viminacium (Kostolatz, both in Serbia) and Ratiaria (Archar). In AD 15 or 14/3 in the newly formed Moesia a march was held by Cn. Cornelius Lentullus, legate of Pannonia, and propraetor L. Tarius Rufus against Dacians and Sarmatians. They first have left Roman troops at garrison here17, established few forts on the right bank of Danube and built roads between them. The area west of Oescus has been constituted as „Regio Triballorum“. This way the Romans began to organize the future line of the Danubian limes.18 In 10/9 ВС another march of the praetorian legate M. Vinicius was held in Moesia and beyond Danube – „trans flumen Danubium“.19 In AD 2/4 C. Aelius Catus headed another campaign north of Danube and transplanted 50 000 Getae in Roman Moesia (Ripa Thraciae) or in Thrace.20 By AD 9 yet, two Roman legions and some auxiliary units known to have been stationed in pre-provincial lands of Moesia – legio V Macedonica at oescus21, and legio IIII Scythica, whose camp is still unidentified, may have been Ratiaria or Viminacium. During the reign of Tiberius, the tribes of Bastarnae and Scythians were at first contained by the Thracian leader and king Rhoemetalces II, and later when the ‘puppet’ Thracian kingdom weakened, along with the Dacians, they increasingly made incursions south of the Danube. This situation, however, was reversed and the Roman position much strengthened during the reigns of Claudius and Nero (AD 41–68). In AD 62 the provincial governor of Moesia – Tiberius Plautius Silvanus, transferred over 100 000 Dacians across the Danube, making them liable to pay tribute to Rome. He also suppressed an incipient rebellion of the Sarmatae in Valachia. Through treaties and hostage taking with the Bastarnae, Roxolani and Dacians, T. Plautius menaged to establish a relatively stabile regime in Moesia.22 164 ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II During same period, Moesia was expanded eastwards up to the mouth of river Iatrus (present Jantra).23 Then a new military camp was built at Novae (near the town of Svishtov) and garrisoned by legio VIII Augusta.24 Roman historian Suetonius reported that six thousand soldiers from three legions in Moesia took part in the Civil War at Italy, siding Otho against Vitellius in the battle near Aquileia.25 However, soon the entire Moesian army – exercitus Moesiae, took the side of Vespasian, when he opposed Vitellius, in the final phase of the Civil War. A general of Vespasian, Licinius Mucianus advancing through the Balkans towards Italy, suppressed with his legio VI Ferrata a major Dacian invasion in Moesia and in the Black Sea.26 By the end of 69 legio VIII Augusta had left Moesia, replaced at Novae by legio I Italica27, that was created by Nero in AD 66, and posted by the new emperor Vespasian for having sided during the Civil war with the eventual loser Vitellius. But in the winter of AD 69/70, Roman garrisons along the Lower Danube suffered great difficulties when Dacians, Sarmatians, and Roxolani crossed the river and invaded in the province.28 They did not meet serious resistance and devastated Moesian lands. The barbarians defeated two Roman legions – legio I Italica and legio V Alaudae29, and the governor of Moesia – C. Fonteius Agrippa was killed in early AD 70. The military success against invaded barbarians was achieved with high difficulties, mainly due to insufficiency of army forces.30 During Vespasian and after the activity of Rubrius Gallus the Danubian limes was seriously reinforced.31 Undoubtedly, these events imposed extreme conditions in Moesia and deeply reflected to the economic and financial situation of the region. Units and legions were often replaced here, and movement of the passing by legions from the East to Italy, resulted in an intensive import of goods and new ‘fresh’ money. ThE ROMAN ARMY IN MOESIA IN ThE 1st c. AD The movement and deployment of the Roman troops was a main factor for the presence of the Julio-Claudian coins not only in Lower Danube but in the entire Empire. The garrison of Moesia, up to its division in AD 86, varied between 2 and 4 legions, or in numbers – 11 000 to 18 000 soldiers. By AD 45 it was consisted only two legions – legio V Macedonica and legio IIII Scythica, with exception of the auxiliary units, whose number increased with the strengthening of the power of Dacian state. From AD 45 to 62, there were 3 legions in Moesia: to these two legio VIII Augusta was added, and then legio IIII Scythica was replaced by legio VII Claudia. In AD 62, legio V Macedonica was sent to the East, and the place of legio VIII Augusta at Novae was taken from legio I Italica. Thus we have a constant number of at least two legions in the Lower Moesian region. The auxiliary troops in the 1st century Ad along the Moesian limes were also numerous.32 Neither for earlier period up to Neronian time their number does nor exceed 10 units. We could mention here: • Equestrian units (alae) – ala Scrubulorum (encamped at the Asamus river, near 165 Rodolfo Martini, Evgeni Paunov • EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS... Nikopol); ala Bosporanorum milliaria = ala I Gallorum et Bosporanorum (based in Securisca, pres. Cherkovitsa); ala Pansiana (stationed in oescus, along with legio V Macedonica); ala I Capitoniana = ala I Claudia Gallorum Capitoniana (based in Augustae, pres. Harlets); ala Augusta (also based in Augustae, pres. Harlets33). • Pedestrian units (cohortes) – cohors I Cisipadensium (in the west part of Moesia, probably in Bononia, entire 1st c. AD); cohors I Cilicum milliaria (in in the west part of Moesia, up to Domitian). • Mixed troops (cohortes equitatae) – cohors I Claudia Sugambrorum veterana equitata (since AD 26/7 based in Montana); cohors III Augusta Cyrenaica sagittariorum equitata (with unknown station); cohors I Aquitanorum veterana equitata (between AD 57–70). We cannot be certain about the presence and their exact dislocation in the province, since the first extant auxiliary diploma militaria for Moesia dates to the Ad 75. It lists soldiers from the 10 cohorts, discharged by emperor Vespasian on April 28th.34 In any MAP 1. Roman Imperial sites in Bulgaria, 1st–3rd centuries lEgENd  – Legionary fort/castra  – Town (municipium/colonia)  – Veteran settlement/villas (military diplomata found) 166  – Auxiliary camp/castellum  – Military/road station ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II MAP 2. Provenance of Roman countermarked coins in Northern Bulgaria LEGEND NuMBER oF CouNTERMARKED CoINS FouND IN AREA: 1–10 – – 100–500 – 10–50 – oVER 500 – 50–100 HoARDS of Countermarked coins: 1. From utus (pres. Guljantsi) 2 hoards: A. 29 coins in a pot (found 1999, now dispersed and lost). B. 44 coins (found 2000, in a deep burnt layer). 2. From Ratiaria (pr. Archar village), nearby area 2 hoards too: A. 86 coins – mainly Augustan triumviral asses (found 2000). B. 128 pieces, (found 2001, in a destroyed building, c.2 m depth) II. STRAY COINS (approximate numbers, autumn 2001): Bononia, et area – c.120+ Utus – 855 +44 Florentiana – c.20+ Cherven Brjag – 220+ RATIARIA – 997 + 128+86 Lukovit – 30+ Almus – 200+ Kneja area – 71+ Avgvstae – 205+ Chomakovtsi – 30 I. Regianum – 320+ oESCuS – 195+ Montana area – 419+ Pleven area – 110+ Vratsa area – 30+ Appiaria – 3+ – oVER 1000 167 Rodolfo Martini, Evgeni Paunov • EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS... case, the number of soldiers during earlier period in the Moesian auxilia is close to 6,000 men (at calculation base: ala – 1000, cohors – 480, cohors equitata – 600). An unusual large number of detachments of legions and auxilia were deployed nearly over the entire Danube, on the northwest shore of the Black Sea and inland areas of the province. After the two Dacian wars in AD 101/2 and 105/6, in the eastern part of the Moesian limes at Durostorum was garrisoned another legion, coming from Pannonia – legio XI Claudia.35 In the course of the 1st century AD significant Roman military and civil presence had been established in Moesia. Forts were built at the confluence of the important tributaries of the Danube, near the river mouths (Lom, Tsibritsa, Ogosta, Iskur, Osam, Vit, Iantra, Rusenski Lom), with their dominant position, overlooking the plain north in Dacia. A sophisticated road system was built and well maintained – with numerous station buildings (mansio, mutatio) and small posts (turris, burgus) along the main limes road known as “via Danubiana”.36 Towns began to arise, based on the Italian model (municipiae or coloniae), mainly between the main legionary camps along the Danube. Examples include Ratiaria and Oescus37, with rich buildings of religious or public use, as well as many other smaller settlements – camps of auxiliary units, forts (castra). TERRITORIAL DISTRIBUTION Unfortunately, the absence of stratigraphically excavated numismatic material is preventing from any indisputable conclusions. And hence, the provenance is doubtful – the comparative value is still limited. Until now the number of published countermarked coins from excavations of Roman sites along the Lower Danube does not exceed ten. Only few pieces from Oescus38, Appiaria39 and Ratiaria40 are known. Recently a new group of ca. 40 coins from the fort of Augustae is being prepared for publication.41 The authors of the present study succeeded to gather a large group of ca. 4500 countermarked Roman aes-coins of 1st century AD. All of them are reported to been discovered in the area between the right bank of Danube river and the north slopes of the Stara planina mountain range.42 The Danubian limes of undivided Moesia limits the general area of distribution of the Roman countermarked coins. They are found most often in the hinterland (a zone wide up to 20–80 km south of river Danube) in the areas of following major modern towns of Northern Bulgaria: • Vidin: near villages Vruv (Florentiana), Labets (Pomodiana) and around Vidin itself (Bononia); • Lom: mainly from the area of the village Archar (Ratiaria) and Lom (Almus) itself; • oryahovo: mainly from the villages of Leskovets (Variana), town of Kozloduy (Regiana/-um) and Hurlets (Augustae); • Montana: from the villages of Belimel, town of Berkovitsa and in the town of Montana itself (ancent Montana); 168 ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II • Byala Slatina and Knezhja area; • Cherven brjyag and village of Chomakovstsi; • Svishtov: chiefly around the site of Novae and its satellite setllements; • Pleven: from numerous sites, among them are: Nikopol, Gigen (around Oescus), Riben (Ad Putea), Gulyantsi (Utus), Milkovitsa, Byala voda, Belene (Dimum), Dolni Dubnik, Tuchenitsa, Muselievo (Asamus), Grivitsa, and southward up to town of Lovech (mansio Melta); • Russe/Silistra: very few countermarked pieces are known from this area, mainly nearby Ryahovo (Appiaria). Naturally, the concentration of countermarked coins from modern Bulgaria, clearly follows the disposition and percentage of the Roman military forces in the west of Moesia (cf. Map 2). PATTERNS OF CIRCULATION Stray finds of countermarked coins are predominant number, over 99%, coming from all types of Roman archaeological sites in North Bulgaria (Map 2), as follows: • Legionary camps – Ratiaria, Oescus, Novae and Durostorum. • Auxiliary camps/forts – e.g. Augustae, Variana, Montana, Utus, Appiaria, Dimum, etc. • Satellite settlements of soldiers/veterans – between big military camps on the via Danubiana, and inland Moesia (e.g. Chomakovsti, Koynare, etc). • Small settlements inland Moesia – multiple ones in Montana, Vidin and Pleven regions. • Houses/villa’s of veterans – again in the same areas. Coin hoards containing only early imperial aes-countermarks are still very rare in Moesia. This could be explained that these coins were predominantly small change, for local needs and circulation. As far as we know, there are only four hoards for the moment – two from the auxiliary fort at Utus (pres. town of Gulyantsi) (29 coins in a pot /now dispersed and lost/, and second one of 44 coins), and two hoards from Ratiaria area (first contains 86 coins – mainly Augustan triumviral asses; and the second – 128 pieces, from a ruined building).43 The region along the Iskur river (anc. Oescus), and those between Tsibritsa and Iskur, is very abundant of Augustan aes-countermarked coins – especially the sites around Montana, Vratsa, Knezhja, Byala Slatina and Chomakovtsi. This is a strong proof for an early military presence in Julio-Claudian period yet. At its part Oescus served as the garrison headquarter of the legio V Macedonica (5th Macedonian) even before the foundation of the province of Moesia in AD 12/5. An interesting phenomenon is the scarce presence of countermarked triumviral and Augustan asses/dupondii east from the river Iatrus (pres. Yantra). This fact might only be easily explained that the area was annexed to the territory of Moesia later – during the reigns of Claudius or Nero.44 Positioned on the geographic map by their provenance 169 Rodolfo Martini, Evgeni Paunov • EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS... in North Bulgaria (cf. Map 2), the countermarked coins clearly show the major and secondary camps and forts of the Roman army in 1st c. AD and the road system of the province. AN ATTEMPT FOR SOME CONCLUSIONS The countermarked bronze coins that have been discovered up to now in Moesia came from major military sites on the Lower Danube. Possibly their commanders gave those coins to the Roman soldiers as monthly salaries (stipendia), rewards and donations. A high percentage of these coins is highly worn and illegible and obviously their counter-marking extended their validity in circulation. Apparently all coins were in use for the needs of the local provincial market. It can be easily supposed that the counter-stamping of worn aes-coins been has ordered and done by the military administration of the legions and smaller auxiliary units in this province around the middle of 1st century AD. This counter-making activity was made extensively under Claudius and even in the early years of Nero’s reign, probably between AD 45/46 and 55/60 (cf. supra, comments by R.M.). Based on our profound observations and historical situation in Moesia, most probably the production and countermarking of coins was centralized in the main legionary camps of Ratiaria and Oescus. The withdraw from circulation of the countermarked aes-coins in Moesia, was organized and held soon after the Civil War crisis and under the Vespasian new monetary policy.45 At many archaeological sites in Moesia coins are found in layers of forts dating no later than the Flavians. At this time most of the worn coins, re-countermarked many times after Augustus, completely lost their value in the new conditions and were thrown away by their owners. 170 ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II R. Martini. Monete romane imperiali contromarcate di bronzo dall’area delle province della Moesia e della Thracia di I secolo d.C. Volume I: Parte 1. Tipologia delle contromarche; Parte 2. Catalogo del materiale (Censimento delle monete dalla Moesia e dalla Thracia e delle contromarche dall’area pannonica); Parte 3. Monete ausiliarie e falsificazioni. (= Collezione numismatiche 2 – Civiche raccolte numismatiche). Milano, 2002: edizioni „Ennerre“, pp. 215–226. 2 A countermark TI•C•Æ is found on an imitation ass of Claudius, cf. R. Martini. Op. cit., p. 81, n. 978. 3 Respectively R. Martini. Op. cit., pp. 31 and 34. 4 The P•P countermark is not documented among the finds in Pannonia, cf. P. Kos, A. Šemrov. Roman Imperial Coins and Countermarks on the 1st century (Augustus – Traianus). (= Situla 33: The Collection of the Numismatic Cabinet of the National Museum). Ljubljana, 1995; R. Martini, Op. cit., p. 22. 5 For the attribution to Carnuntum military camp, see D. W. MacDowall. An Early Imperial Countermark from Pannonia. – The Numismatic Chronicle VI4, 1966, pp. 125–133; R. Martini. Op. cit., p. 18. 6 generally P. Kos, A. Šemrov. Op. cit.; cf. R. Martini. Op. cit., p. 19. 7 P. Kos, A. Šemrov. Op. cit., pp. 50–51; R. Martini. Op. cit., p. 20 (about simple type IMP); and p. 21 (the type in ligature). 8 Respectively R. Martini. Op. cit., pp. 23–24 (the AVG type); p. 25 (the T•C•A type); p. 26, (the TI•C•A type); p. 27 (the TI•CÆ type); p. 28 (right-facing dolphin „with objects“); p. 29 (right-facing dolphin „without objects“); and p. 30 (helmet). 9 Very few instances are now known of a TI•C•A countermark with the lettering of the isolated type associated with the types within (C1). 10 Respectively, R. Martini. Op. cit., p. 31 (DV type), p. 32 (GALBA, ΓΑΛBA and ΓAΛKAI); p. 33 (the PR type), and p. 34 (head of Hercules r.). 11 R. Martini. Op. cit., pp. 207–208, including the left-facing goat’s head variety. 12 R. Martini. Op. cit., p. 209, no. 4087, for a left-facing head of Claudius, on Augustan issue of the Antiochia ad Orontem mint not further identifiable. 13 Cf. here, section „Territorial Distribution“. 14 About the date of establishment of Moesia cf.: T. Mommsen. The Provinces of the Roman Empire. New York, 1885, (19092); Scribners Publ., p. 217 ff.; B. Filow. Die Legionen der Provinz Moesia von Augustus bis auf Diokletian (= Klio Beiheft VI). Leipzig, 1906 (Aalen 19632); B. gerov. La Romanisation entre le Danube et les Balkans. Partie I: D’Auguste à Hadrien (in Bulg., French summary), (= Annuaire de l’Université de Sofia, Faculté Historico-Philologique, vol. 45/3). Sofia, 1948/49, p. 7; V. Velkov. The Roman Invasion to the Balkans and the transformation into provinces (in Bulg.). – In: История на България, том І. София, 1979, p. 287. 15 R. Syme. The Roman Revolution. Oxford–New York, 1939 (19924), p. 394. 16 Cf. Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, (= CIL), vol. III, no. 4013; C. Patsch. Aus 500 Jahren vorrömischer und römischer Geschichte Südosteuropas. Erste Teil: Bis zur Festsetzung der Römer in Transdanuvien (Beitrage zur Völkerkunde von Südosteuropa, V). Wien–Leipzig, 1933: Hölder-PilcherTempsky verlag, pp. 45–47. 17 Flor., II, 28, 19–20; Tac. Ann. 4, 44; Prosopographia Imperii Romani, (PIR2), C 1379. 18 C. Patsch. Op. cit., pp. 91 ff; B. gerov. Op. cit., p. 6. 19 h. Dessau. Insriptiones Latinae Selectae, (= ILS), no. 8965; R. Syme. Op.cit., p. 400, no. 3. 20 Strabo. VII, 3, 10. 21 B. Filow. Op. cit., pp. 36–56, 63–70. 22 C. Patsch. Op. cit., pp. 163 ff. 23 M. Zahariade, N. gudea. The Fortifications of Lower Moesia (A.D. 86–275). Amsterdam, 1997, p. 25; after the Prof. T. Sarnowski conclusions by the Novae excavations – T. Sarnowski. Woysko Rzymskoe w Mezij Dolnej (= Novaensia 3), Waszawa, 1988, p. 26. 24 B. Filow. Op. cit., pp. 8, 20. 25 Suet., Vesp. VI. 1 171 Rodolfo Martini, Evgeni Paunov • EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS... Tacit., Hist., III, 46; C. Patsch. Op. cit., p. 177. B. Filow. Op. cit., pp. 26–88; B. gerov. Op. cit., p. 10. 28 Tacit., Hist., I, 79, 1; C. Patsch. Op. cit., p. 179 ff. 29 Joseph., Bell. Iud., VII. 89; Tacit., Hist., IV, 54; B. gerov. Op. cit., p. 10. 30 Tacit., Hist., III, 85; IV, 54. 31 Joseph., Bell. Iud., VII, 4. 90; C. Patsch. Op. cit., pp. 179–181. 32 B. Filow. Auxiliartruppen der römischen provinz Mösien (in Bulg.). – Bulletin de la Societé historique bulgare, 2, 1906, рp. 41–90; B. gerov. Op. cit., pp. 40–44; J. Beneš. Auxilia Romana in Moesia atque in Dacia. Zu den fragen des römischen Veteidigungssystems in Unteren Donauraum und in den angrenzenden Gebieten (= Rocnik VI, 2). Praha, 1978; P. A. holder. Studies in the Auxilia of the Roman Army from Augustus to Trajan (= BAR International Series 70). Oxford, 1980, pp. 156–158. 33 for the site see S. Maschov. Die Spätantike Befestigung und Früh-Byzantinisch Stadt von Augusta bei dorf Hurletz, Vratza bezirk. – In: G. S. Susini (ed.), Limes, Studi di Storia, vol. 5. Bologna 1994, S. 21–36. 34 M. M. Roxan. Roman Military Diplomas 1954–1977. London, 1978, pp. 30–31, no. 2. 35 B. Filow. Op. cit., pp. 63–86; B. gerov. Op. cit., p. 11. 36 Popovic, P. (ed.). Roman Limes on the Middle and Lower Danube. Belgrade, 1997; R. Ivanov. Die Römische Verteidigungssystem an der Unteren Donau zwischen Dorticum et Durostorum (Bulgarien) von Augustus bis Maurikios. – Bericht der RGK 78. Frankfurt, 1997, 467–640; R. Ivanov. The defence System along the Lower Danube between Dorticum and Durostorum from Augustus to Mauricius, (in Bulg., English summary). Sofia, 1999, passim. 37 T. Ivanov. Die Römischen Städte in Ober- und Untermösien. – In: L’Adriatico tra Mediterraneo e Peninsola balcanica nell’antichita (= Atti del 230 convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia). Taranto, 1983, pp. 257–273; T. Ivanov, R.T. Ivanov. Ulpia Oescus. Vol. I: Roman and Early-Byzantine town (in Bulg., English summary). Sofia, 1998. 38 g. Kabakchieva. Frührömische Militärlager in Oescus (Nordbulgarien). – Germania 74/1. Frankfurt, 1996, S. 95–117; Eadem. Oescus. Castra Oescensia. Frührömische Militärlager bei der Mündung des Flusses Iskar (in Bulg., Germ. summary). Sofia, 2000, pp. 34–35, no. A.3, pl. I2–3. 39 D. Vladimirova-Aladjova. Countermarked Roman coins from Lower Danube. – Macedonian Numismatic Journal (Skopje), 3, 1999, рр. 45–49. 40 B. Boškova. Monete antiche di Ratiaria. – In: Ratiarensia vol. 3–4. Studi e Materiali Mesici e Danubiani (= Actti del convegno internazionale sul Limes, Vidin, 1985). Bologna, 1987, p. 95 ff, tab. 23. 41 E. Paunov. Roman countermarked and halved aes coins from Augustae, Moesia Inferior (Northwestern Bulgaria). – Annotazioni Numismatiche, 49, Supplemento. Milano, 2003 (in print). 42 The same area is mentioned always as provenance for the „countermarks on sale“ at coin market in Europe, UK and the United States: – North Bulgaria and/or South Romania. 43 Acquired by Civiche raccolte numismatiche at Milan, to be published by R. Martini. 44 About the territorial change of Moesian border cf. supra, notes 23–24. Few worn-out sestertii of Claudius and Nero with countermark GALBA from the V. Turnovo area confirms that observation. To be published. 45 The future emperor Vespasian was tribunus militum of a Moesian legion in AD 26/7, cf. D. Kienast. Römische Kaisertabelle. Darmstadt, 1996, p. 108. 26 27 172 ACTA MUSEI VARNAENSIS II КонтрамарКирани ранноримсКи императорсКи монети от мизия: първи Критични наблюдения (типология, хронология и анализ на разпространението) Родолфо МаРтИнИ, ЕВгЕнИ ПауноВ (МИлано, СофИя) авторите разглеждат контрамаркираните римски медни и бронзови императорски монети от І в. сл. Хр., намирани често по целия долнодунавски лимес. Сътрудничеството им в последните години позволи коректно научно документиране на над 4000 контрамаркирани монети – асове и триумвирски дупондии на император август (27 г. пр. Хр. – 14 г. сл. Хр.), отсечени в Рим и Ефес, сестерции на император Клавдий (41–54) и техни мизийски имитации, както и много голям брой монетни ядра. Всички те са били използвани за дребни плащания в римската войска и затова се приема, че контрамарките върху тях са поставени от военните власти в провинцията. Предложена е следната типология на контрамарките, поставени върху монети, намерени в Мизия: група A. „Панонски“ типове. това са основно контрамарките (AV)G, CAE (обр. 1), IMP в лигатура, в проста графична версия (обр. 2) или врязана като в картуш (обр. 3), както и P•P. Монети с такива контрамарки се откриват предимно от района на Карнунтум (австрия) до адриатическия бряг на Илирик. група B. „Панонски“ и „мизийски“ типове контрамарки върху едни и същи монети. те първоначално са били отсечени и предназначени за циркулация в дунавските провинции на империята, най-вероятно по граничната зона между Панония и Мизия. група C. Към тази група се отнасят най-голям брой монети. Понастощем тя обхваща около 3500 контрамаркирани екземпляра. основният регион на нейното разпространение е мизийският лимес в сектора между легионерските лагери Рациария (днес с. арчар, Видинско) и дуросторум (днес Силистра). тя се разделя на два типа: C1. Комбинирани „мизийски“ типове. това е най-многобройната група и влючва буквени и фигурални изображения в различни комбинации – от типовете AVG (обр. 4) и TI•CÆ (обр. 5), без съмнение, най-масовите и винаги срещани заедно, следвани от типовете T•C•A (обр. 6) и TI•C•A (обр. 7) и от типа „шлем“, представен фронтално (обр. 8) или в профил (обр. 9) и „делфин надясно“ с предмети (патера/венец (?) в рамката (обр. 10) или без предмети. C2. Самостоятелни „мизийски“ типове. 173 Rodolfo Martini, Evgeni Paunov • EARLY ROMAN IMPERIAL COUNTERMARKED COINS... C2a. тип TI•C•A (обр. 11), несвързан с контрамарките от група C1. Характеризира се с леко наклонено изписване на буквите. Контрамарките са поставени върху неотсечени монетни ядра с тегло от 2,5 до 5 г. Повече от половината документирани монети са с контрамарка от този тип. C2b. типът включва няколко различни контрамарки, които са по-късни от контрамарките, обособени в тип C1. това е контрамарката DV (обр. 12) върху сестерции на император Клавдий и техни местни имитации, групата контрамарки с името на император галба (68–69) (GALBA, гаЛВа и гаЛКаI) (обр. 13), поставени върху монети на император нерон (54–68) и контрамарката PR (обр. 14). освен тях в същата група попадат и контрамарките „глава на Херкулес, надясно“ (обр. 15) и „глава на козел, надясно/ кормило и кълбо“ (обр. 16). C2c. група контрамарки, чието определяне е най-трудно, поради тяхната рядкост или лоша запазеност в резултат на дълготрайна употреба. тя се състои от глави на хора и божества с или без атрибути и предмети. направен е и общ преглед на историческото развитие на Мизия в І век сл. Хр. Изяснени са вида и дислоцирането на римските легиони и помощни военни части в провинцията. Подчертана е тяхната определяща роля за разпространението на контрамаркираните римски бронзови монети. Стига се изводът, че производството на т. нар. ауксилиарни монети и контрамаркирането на бронзови монети е било съсредоточено в двата главни легионни лагера в Мизия – Рациария и Ескус. найвероятно това е станало през управлението на император Клавдий – след 45–46 г., когато тракийското царство е превърнато в римска провинция и в ранните години от управлението на император нерон – до около 54–60 г. Изтеглянето на контрамаркираните бронзови монети от реална циркулация в Мизия е станало веднага след гражданската война през 68/69 г. или в рамките на новата монетна политика на император Веспасиан (69–79). По това време тези силно износени и многократно контрамаркирани монети вече напълно са загубили стойността си и смяната им с нови е била наложителна. 174